8 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 30.8 ms ] thread
[flagged]
It's not culture war though is it? It's a piece of reportage in a leading British newspaper, critiquing the practices of a new field of medicine that might not be as well founded as we'd like it to be.
> It's a piece of reportage in a leading British newspaper

That is culture war. The Times is no better than the Daily Mail in this regard. You can tell that by the zero quotes from trans people; they haven't even bothered to dig up one of the few percent of detransitioners.

> new field of medicine

Trans healthcare dates from the 1920s.

Sounds like you might be running your own culture war to me.

The article is reporting on the data and perspective in a book, one of the data points being that the clinic was set up in 1989, and this seems like it's a fairly recent development to me, particularly the treatment of children as young as three with medical interventions like drugs and hormones, which is novel even though trans people are not, such as fafalines in the Pacific, having always been a part of human civilisation in one form or another. It might also be likely that the detransitioners aren't amenable to talking. A culture war would be one where you're unable to write your own book, but it seems like you are, so perhaps you should write one.

A article from the relatively neutral Times of London which suggests a deeper investigation into whether the treatment of patients may be biased due to financials is neither anti-trans nor culture war.
East German doping? No. This all looks way more like the lobotomy craze of the XXth century.